Skip navigation

Zeroed Defaults vs. Zeroed RAW File?

Jan 13, 2012 9:12 AM

  Latest reply: Jeff Schewe, Feb 21, 2012 6:47 PM
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 25, 2012 7:59 PM   in reply to TK2142

    TK2142 wrote:


    So it seems that the feedback from the Revel team was even the primary motivation to change the basic panel controls.

     

    Well, the Revel team was headed by Mark Hamburg who, wait for it, was the founding engineer of Lightroom (and is an Adobe Fellow). So yes, Mark's input is pretty important–not as important as say, Thomas Knoll (in my opinion) but pretty darn important none the less. If you like Lightroom in any measure, you might want to thank Mark...because it was Mark who decided to do "Shadowland" which ultimately ended up as Lightroom.

     

    Read that...maybe you'll get a clue. Or not...

     

    BTW, Mark was the #2 engineer on Photoshop...that tell you anything?

     

    What do you think you know?

     

    Really?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 25, 2012 8:33 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Ultimately sure, I can create a preset with the exposure, blacks and tone curve settings. And if I want to I can take all of the points off the point curve and make a weird reverse parametric curve and have my point curve back, or I can start with the points on the curve. That's true.

     

    And honestly it's not that the adjustments don't work per se. This is a beta, and feedback was asked for, so here we are. a group of people think it sucks that you can't zero your raw files. I happen to be one of them. That's all. This is a preference thing, and here's  the message: It sucks that you cannot zero your raw files and have to take adobe's garbage starting point. One more opinion and one more voice in the choir so these things get said. Again, my opinion and two bucks will get you a cup of coffee, but hey man, it's the Internet and we're all opinions here.

     

    Honestly the "post an image where pv2012 is less optimal" argument is kind of a moot one. My answer to that is post an image where PV2012 is better. You can't compare because to do so would be to post them with the same settings and same adjustments, which doesn't seem possible anymore, though I'd have to do more researching before I tried to assert that.

     

    I am curious though how this affects a UI freeze. Adding a button, for example, that is "true zero" and removes the internal tone curves doesn't need to change the UI much at all. The zeroers are happy, the non-zeroers are happy, and nobody loses functionality.

     

    And sure, software companies reserve the right to change software on a dime at any time, no matter the effect on the trainers. Ask Microsoft with Windows 7 and windows phone 7. And apple on anything they've ever done. Agreed, it doesn't mean they will but they can.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 25, 2012 8:47 PM   in reply to john fallavollita

    john fallavollita wrote:

     

    Honestly the "post an image where pv2012 is less optimal" argument is kind of a moot one. My answer to that is post an image where PV2012 is better. You can't compare because to do so would be to post them with the same settings and same adjustments, which doesn't seem possible anymore, though I'd have to do more researching before I tried to assert that.

     

    Well...how big is your hard drive?

     

    For the VAST majority of images, PV 2012 is quicker and easier to arrive at optimal results (when you quit the behavior of trying to comparing PV 2010 to PV 2012)...can you post anything to change that?

     

    Really...I'm interested in seeing any visual results...so is Eric Chan (who works with Thomas Knoll) to try to arrive at optimal results–which is what the engineers are really all about–max image quality. Anything you can add is useful. But just complaining without visual proof it, well, less useful.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 20, 2012 5:18 PM   in reply to john fallavollita

    I did try Jeff's method of zeroing in 3 and importing and upgrading into 4 with results that were close but not right on. With some additonal slider movements including exposure-contrast, whites and blacks and shadow, I was able to get just about a perfect match to the LR3 zeroed flat image. So, it is possible. But, the tone curve  is left with 14 added points that would be nice to be able to easily remove and still maintain the reverse curve as a "linear" flat line default.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 20, 2012 11:22 PM   in reply to john fallavollita

    It's not like Lightroom 3 lets you start from scratch either. You can kind of get there in Aperture by turning off the boosts, but even then I'm not so sure. Anyway, I tried the Lightroom 4 beta, loved the new controls, and now I'm back in 3 where all my pictures are, waiting for the official release. And heck — just switch to the old process if you want the old controls. What's all the hubbub?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 20, 2012 11:43 PM   in reply to jljonathan

    jljonathan wrote:

     

    But, the tone curve  is left with 14 added points that would be nice to be able to easily remove and still maintain the reverse curve as a "linear" flat line default.

     

    That might be considered a feature, not a bug...in point of fact, the old "neutral" setting wasn't really neutral, it was just a surpressed rendering. If you thought setting Brightness and Contrast to zeror and the tone curve to Linear was neutral, then you were kidding yourself...really, the old PV 2010 "neutral" settings were not neutral but only starting with really flat. There's an app for that (it's called PV 2012).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • TK2142
    407 posts
    Jan 20, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 21, 2012 1:02 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Jeff Schewe wrote:

     

    If you thought setting Brightness and Contrast to zeror and the tone curve to Linear was neutral, then you were kidding yourself...really, the old PV 2010 "neutral" settings were not neutral but only starting with really flat.

     

    Eric Chan seems to differ:

     

    === quote ===

    > Eric, can't you also get linear results (except for gamma
    > encoding) by simply setting all the values on the basic
    > ACR panel to zero and also setting the point tone curve to
    > zero?

    Yes, that works too and is equivalent to creating a "linear
    base tone curve" DNG profile using the DNG Profile Editor.


    === unquote ===

    (from http://forums.adobe.com/message/1210327#1210327)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 21, 2012 6:47 PM   in reply to TK2142

    TK2142 wrote:

     

    Quote from Eric Chan:

    Yes, that works too and is equivalent to creating a "linear
    base tone curve" DNG profile using the DNG Profile Editor.

     

     

    So, have you actually tried this? I have...if you edit an Adobe Standard (or vender profile) and make a linear curve in the profile, then yes, you can get pretty much match the results (probably better) in PV 2012 compared to the PV 2010 linear, zeroed settings. Try it...get back to us on your results.

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points